I ‘re-posted’ my entry on the ‘two ways of Web 2.0’ the other day. On the site, I now have a page for the original entry and for the ‘re-post’.
I have just ‘re-posted’ another entry, but this time I chose to do it a different way. I changed the publish date to today’s date, and noted the original date in a note.
I wondered which way was the better, and am not aware of any ‘good practice’ on this issue. It seems to me that newspapers sometimes adopt the latter practice. I notice that PersonaNonData, who occasionally reposts earlier entries, seems to follow the former.
It is interesting to run into this versioning question in a modest way here. I can see pros and cons of each approach and I am sure there is a relevant literature. Something to think about in the new year ….
Share
Comments
Workflow is the new content 1: looking at research support and engagement
The phrase 'workflow is the new content' captures an important insight. In the digital environment we often create, use and share content through workflow applications.
10 min read
University Futures are shaping Library Futures
Libraries are not ends in themselves, but serve the interests of the organizations of which they are a part. As university emphasis varies around research, education and career poles, we can expect to see libraries evolve to support those emphases more strongly.
8 min read
The university's curatorial role
I made a note in these pages a couple of years ago about the University of Edinburgh’s mission statement.
3 min read
